On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Jukka Zitting <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 02/12/10 09:56, Thomas Mueller wrote: >> >> There are multiple ways to reach our goals: >> >> a) refactor in very small steps >> b) replace piece by piece >> c) replace all code we have in one huge step >> >> As far as I understand, you are afraid that c) would take too long? > > Yes. Not necessarily too long in the sense that we shouldn't do it, just too > long to stop making incremental and sometimes backward-incompatible progress > in the stable branch. > >> I would probably try to do b). > > I'd like that, but as you say there may be issues with that. Going this route > it would be even more important to allow major version upgrades like 3.0 and > 4.0 before we're fully done implementing the next-gen architecture.
I'd also opt for (b) as this seems to me to have the best chance of success and acceptance Regards Ard > >> If we anyway want to replace "Core" later on (what you call Jackrabbit >> NG?), some of your refactorings on the current trunk would be "lost" later >> on. Basically we would do the work twice: first refactor the current core, >> and later on replace the current core. In my view, some changes are not >> worth doing twice (more flexible repository configuration, storing search >> indexes inside the repository), but maybe I'm wrong. >
